Comparison of radical prostatectomy techniques: open, laparoscopic and robotic assisted

Advances in localized prostate cancer: A special focus on photothermal therapy

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a high prevalence disease, per 10000 habitants, that tends to increase with age. This pathology is difficult to detect at an early stage due to the absence of symptoms, hence the importance of monitoring signs for early detection. This disease can be detected by various methods, including plasmatic levels of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and rectal touch, with biopsy being necessary to confirm the diagnosis. Patients affected by prostate cancer can have localized or advanced disease. There are conventional approaches that have been used as a reference in localized cancer, such as active surveillance, surgery, or radiotherapy. However, the adverse effects might vary and, sometimes, they can be permanent. An overview about the innovative therapeutic approaches to improve outcomes in terms of both tumor remission and side effects for localized PCa is presented. In case of emerging light-based treatment strategies, they aimed at ablating tumor tissue by inducing an external light are non-invasive, localized and, considerably, they are able to reduce lesions in peripheral tissues. One is photodynamic therapy (PDT) and it involves the photooxidation of molecules culminating in the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), inducing cell death. On the other hand, photothermal therapy (PTT) is based on inducing hyperthermia in cancer cells by irradiating them with beams of light at a specific wavelength. To improve the heat generated, gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) have those desirable characteristics that have drawn attention to PTT. Various studies point to AuNPs as efficient nanomaterials in PTT for the treatment of tumors, including prostate cancer. This review includes the most representative advances in this research field, dated from 1998 to 2023. It is noticed that several advances have been made and the way to find the effective treatment without impacting adverse side effects is shorter.

Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) Trifecta Learning Curve for Surgeons with Previous Experience in Laparoscopy

Background and Objectives: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a complex surgery with a steep learning curve (LC). No clear evidence exists for how previous laparoscopic experience affects the RARP LC. We report the LC of three surgeons with vast experience in laparoscopy (more than 400 procedures), analyzing the results of functional and oncological outcomes under the "Trifecta" concept (defined as the achievement of continence, potency, and oncological control free of biochemical recurrence). Materials and Methods: The surgical experience of the three surgeons from September 2021 to December 2022, involving 146 RARP consecutive patients in a single institution center, was evaluated prospectively. Erectile disfunction patients were excluded. ANOVA and chi-square test were used to compare the distribution of variables between the three surgeons. LC analysis was performed using the cumulative sum control chart (CUSUM) technique to achieve trifecta. Results: The median age was 65.42 (±7.34); the clinical stage were T1c (68%) and T2a (32%); the biopsy grades were ISUP 1 (15.9%), ISUP 2 (47.98), and ≥ISUP 3 (35%). The median surgical time was 132.8 (±32.8), and the mean intraoperative bleeding was 186 cc (±115). Complications included the following: Clavien-Dindo I 8/146 (5.47%); II 9/146 (6.16%); and III 3/146 (2.05%). Positive margins were reported in 44/146 (30.13%). The PSA of 145/146 patients (99%) at 6 months was below 0.08. Early continence was achieved in 101/146 (69.17%), 6-month continence 126/146 (86%), early potency 51/146 (34.9%), and 6-month potency 65/146 (44%). Surgeons "a", "b", and "c" performed 50, 47, and 49 cases, respectively. After CUSUM analysis, the "Trifecta" LC peak was achieved at case 19 in surgeon "a", 21 in surgeon "b", and 20 in surgeon "c". Conclusions: RARP LC to accomplish "Trifecta" can be significantly reduced in surgeons with previous experience in laparoscopy and be achieved at around 20 cases.

The assessment of erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy using pudendal somatosensory evoked potential

Erectile dysfunction in patients who underwent radical prostatectomy was evaluated with pudendal somatosensory evoked potentials (PSEP) to measure and predict erectile dysfunction objectively. Fifty-seven patients who completed requirements were included in the study. Patients were divided into 2 groups (potency/non-potency). Erectile function recovery was defined as question 2 and 3 on the IIEF-5 questionnaire at 12 months after surgery. The two-channel PSEP test was performed at the day before RP and 3-6 months after RP. Twenty patients were assigned to the potency group and 37 to the non-potency group. Mean age was less in the potency group. Other clinical variables were similar in two groups. The non-potency group had prolonged lumbar and cortical latencies in postoperative PSEP, and the mean differences of latencies between pre- and postoperative PSEP in lumbar and cortical regions were also greater in the non-potency group. Logistic regression analysis showed that age, lumbar post-operative latency, cortical post-operative latency, and difference of latency in lumbar region were associated with non-potency; odds ratios were 1.292 (p = 0.018), 0.425 (p = 0.047), 1.637 (p < 0.001), and 3.272 (p = 0.010), respectively. This study suggests that PSEP is an effective means of evaluating erectile dysfunction in prostate cancer patients after surgery.

Randomized controlled trial comparing open anterograde anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy with retrograde technique

Objective

Radical prostatectomy is the recommended treatment for localized prostate cancer; however, it is an invasive procedure that can leave serious morbidity. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy was introduced with the aim of reducing postoperative morbidity and facilitating rapid recovery compared to the traditional Walsh's open radical retropubic prostatectomy. Therefore, a protocol was developed to perform an open prostatectomy comparable to that performed by robotics, but without involving novel instrumentation.

Methods

A total of 220 patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer underwent radical prostatectomy. They were divided into two groups: anterograde technique (115 patients) and the retrograde method (105 patients). The study outcomes were observed 3 months after surgery.

Results

No differences were found in terms of surgical time, hospital stay, and suction drainage. However, reduced bleeding was observed in the anterograde technique (p=0.0003), with rapid anastomosis duration (p=0.005). Among the patients, 60.9% undergoing the anterograde technique were continent 3 months after surgery compared to 42.9% treated by the retrograde method (p=0.007). Additionally, fewer complications in terms of the number (p=0.007) and severity (p=0.0006) were observed in the anterograde technique.

Conclusion

The anterograde method displayed increased efficiency in reducing complications, compared to the retrograde technique.

Comparison of early oncologic and functional results of open and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

Aim: Radical prostatectomy (RP) has undergone a remarkable transformation from open surgery to minimally invasive surgery over the past two decades. In our study, we aimed to compare patients who underwent open (ORRP) and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) for localized prostate cancer in terms of early oncological and functional outcomes. Material and Methods: Our study included 537 patients who were diagnosed with prostate cancer and underwent RP between January 2009 and January 2014. (Open retropubic radical prostatectomy (ORRP)=387, robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP)=150). Demographic data, perioperative and postoperative results of the patients were compared between the two groups. Results: The mean age of the patients was 62.9 (46-76) in the ORRP group and 61.1 (42-76) years in the RARP group. It was observed that the mean hospital stay, urethral catheterization time, and blood transfusion requirement were significantly shorter in the RARP group. Surgical margin positivity rates were 16.3% and 20% (p=0.412) for the ORRP and RARP groups, respectively, in those with pT2 stage, and 40.9% and 68.8% in the ORRP and RARP groups, respectively, in patients with pT3 stage (p= 0.05). The mean follow-up period was 30.6 (3-64) months in the ORRP group and 11.3 (1-24) months in the RARP group. At follow-up, anastomotic stricture and biochemical recurrence were observed to be less in the RARP group (3.9% vs. 29.9% p

Robotic radical prostatectomy in 93 cases: Outcomes of the first ERUS robotic urology curriculum trained surgeon in Turkey

OBJECTIVE

This study presents the surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes of the first 93 robotic radical prostatectomy (RARP) procedures performed in Erzurum, Turkey. These procedures were performed by a single surgeon who had completed the European Association of Urology Robotic Urology Section (ERUS) RARP curriculum in an ERUS-certified training center in Ankara.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study present the results of 93 RARP procedures performed by a single surgeon. The surgeon performing the operations completed an ERUS training program structured for RARP by two robotic surgeons holding ERUS training certificates in an ERUS-approved academic robotic surgery training center in Ankara. The RARP cases performed by the surgeon after completion of the training between April 2016 and August 2018 were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 63.62±7.04 years, and the mean preoperative serum prostate-specific antigen level was 8.34±4.96 ng/mL. Preoperatively, 82 and 4 patients had prostate biopsy Gleason scores of 3+3 and 4+3, respectively. Bilateral neurovascular bundle (NVB) sparing, unilateral NVB-sparing, and non-NVB-sparing surgery were performed in 21, 13, and 59 cases, respectively. The mean prostate weight was 85.34±47.57 g. Posterior rhabdosphincter reconstruction was performed in 60 (64.5%) cases. Mean console time, intraoperative blood loss, duration of hospital stay, and urethral catheter removal time were 170.49±36.50 min, 100.70±34.08 cc, 6.84±2.28 days, and 7.40±3.11 days, respectively. During the perioperative period (0-30 days), five minor (prolonged drain output, n=3; rectocele, n=1; gout arthritis, n=1) and six major (inguinal hernia, n=1; incisional hernia, n=2; anastomotic urinary leakage, n=2; myocardial infarction, n=1) complications were identified. No complication was detected during postoperative days 31-90. Postoperative pathological stages included pT2a, pT2b, and pT2c disease in 77 (82.8%), 9 (9.7%), and 7 (7.5%) patients, respectively. The positive surgical margin (SM) rate was 10.7% (n=10), including patients with pT2a (n=6) and pT2c (n=2) diseases. Eleven (11.8%) patients underwent pelvic lymph node (LN) dissection. The mean LN yield was 16.45±4.29. The mean length of follow-up was 11.17±8.01 months. Biochemical recurrence was observed in two patients, one of whom received maximal androgen blockage (MAB), and the other one received pelvic radiotherapy+MAB. All the patients with at least one-year follow-up (n=48, 51.6%) were fully continent (0 pads/day). Of the 40 (43%) patients with no preoperative erectile dysfunction (ED) and with at least three-month follow-up, 18 (45%) had no ED, with or without any additional medication including phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE5) inhibitors.

CONCLUSION

RARP is a safe minimally invasive procedure with acceptable morbidity, excellent operative, pathological and oncological outcomes, and satisfactory functional results. The ERUS RARP curriculum provides effective and sufficient training.

Surgical Management of Organ-Confined Prostate Cancer with Review of Literature and Evolving Evidence

Prostate cancer is the most common solid organ malignancy in men in the USA with an annual incidence of 105 and an annual mortality rate of 19 per 100,000 people. With the advent of PSA screening, the majority of prostate cancer diagnosed is organ confined. Recent studies including the SPCG-4 and PIVOT trials have demonstrated a survival benefit for those undergoing active treatment for localized prostate cancer. The foremost surgical option has been radical prostatectomy (RP). The gold standard has been open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP); however, minimally invasive approaches including laparoscopic and robotic approaches are commonplace and increasing in popularity. We aim to describe the surgical options for the treatment of localized prostate cancer by reviewing the literature. A review of the literature was undertaken using MEDLINE and PubMed. Articles addressing the topic of radical prostatectomy by open, laparoscopic and robotic approaches were selected. Studies comparing the different modalities were also identified. These articles were reviewed for data pertaining to perioperative, oncological and functional outcomes. There is a paucity of randomized studies comparing the three modalities. The published data has demonstrated a benefit in favour of robotically assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) over laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and traditional open RRP in perioperative outcomes. When reviewing the best-reported outcomes for RALP compared to LRP and RRP, operative times are lower (105 vs. 138 vs. 138 min), estimated blood loss rates are lower (111 vs. 200 vs. 300 ml) and blood transfusion rates are lower as in the length of stay (1 vs. 2 vs. 2.3 days) and overall complication rates (4.3 vs. 5 vs. 20%). Similarly, when reviewing functional outcomes, RALP compared to LRP was not inferior. At 12 months, the reported continence was 97 vs. 94 vs. 89% and potency was 94 vs. 77 vs. 90%. In comparative studies, however, these differences did not always meet statistical significance. With respect to oncological outcomes, there was no clear evidence of superiority of one modality over another. RALP is now the most common modality for surgical treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer. Individual series appear to support better perioperative outcomes and perhaps quicker return to functional outcomes. There does not appear to be a clear advantage to date in oncological parameters; however, RALP does not appear to be inferior to either LRP or RRP. It is anticipated that further high quality randomized studies will shed more light on the clinical and statistical significance in the comparison between these modalities.

Pentafecta Rates of Three-Dimensional Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Our Experience after 150 Cases

Introduction

Three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy with a flexible camera was developed to overcome the main limitation of traditional laparoscopic surgery, which is two-dimensional (2D) vision. The aim of our article is to present the largest casistic of 3D laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) available in literature and evaluate our results in terms of pentafecta and compare it with the literature.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated consecutive patients who underwent LRP with 3D technology between March 2014 and December 2015. Total operative time (TOT), anasthomosis time (AT), blood loss and complications were registered. All patients presented at least 3 months of follow-up. Surgical outcome was evaluated in terms of Pentafecta.

Results

One hundred fifty consecutive patients underwent 3D LRP. Mean follow-up was 16.9 months. Mean age was 67.7 ± 8.3 years (range 50-76). Mean preoperative PSA value was 8.3 ± 5.8 ng/ml and mean bioptic Gleason Score (GS) was 6.6. We had a mean TOT of 158 ± 23 minutes and a mean AT of 25 ± 12.6. Mean blood loss was 240 ± 40 ml. Eighteen (12%) postoperative complications occurred. Pathologic results: pT2 in 91 patients (58%) and pT3 in 59 (39.3%). Pentafecta was reached by 31.3% of patients at 3 months and 51.6% at 12 months.

Conclusions

Our oncological and functional results are comparable to those present in literature for laparoscopic and robotic surgery. We believe that our findings can encourage the use of 3D laparoscopy especially considering the increasing attention to healthcare costs.

Impact of cosmetic result on selection of surgical treatment in patients with localized prostate cancer

Objectives:

To analyze the effect of cosmetic outcome as an isolated variable in patients undergoing surgical treatment based on the incision used in the 3 variants of radical prostatectomy: open (infraumbilical incision and Pfannestiel incision) and laparoscopic, or robotic (6 ports) surgery.

Patients and methods:

612 male patients 40 to 70 years of age with a negative history of prostate disease were invited to participate. Each patient was evaluated by questionnaire accompanied by a set of 6 photographs showing the cosmetic appearance of the 3 approaches, with and without undergarments.

Participants ranked the approaches according to preference, on the basis of cosmesis. We also recorded demographic variables: age, body mass index, marital status, education level, and physical activity.

Results:

Of the 577 patients who completed the questionnaries, the 6-port minimally invasive approach represents the option preferred by 52% of the participants, followed by the Pfannestiel incision (46%), and the infraumbilical incision (11%), respectively. The univariate and multivariate analyses did not show statistically significant differences when comparing the approach preferred by the patients and the sub-analyses for demographic variables, except for patients who exercised who preferred the Pfannestiel incision (58%) instead of minimally invasive approach (42%) with statistically significant differences.

Conclusion:

The minimally invasive approach was the approach of choice for the majority of patients in the treatment of prostate cancer. The Pfannestiel incision represents an acceptable alternative. More research and investment may be necesary to improve cosmetic outcomes.

Robotic surgery is ready for prime time in India: Against the motion

The use of Robotic Surgery as a purported adjunct and aid to Minimal Access Surgery (MAS) is growing in several areas. The acknowledged advantages as also the obvious and hidden disadvantages of Robotic Surgery are highlighted. Survey of literature shows that while Robotic Surgery is “feasible” and the results are “comparable” there is no convincing evidence that it is any better than MAS or even open surgery in most areas. To move “Robotic Surgery is ready for prime time in India” with no less than two dozen robots, many sub-optimally utilized for a population of 1.2 billion seems untenable.

Oncologic results, functional outcomes, and complication rates of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: multicenter experience in Turkey including 1,499 patients

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a rising minimally invasive treatment of localized prostate cancer (PC). We present our multicenter experience of 1,499 consecutive cases with an analysis of complication rates, oncologic, and functional outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From March 2005 through December 2012, details of 1,499 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Transperitoneal approach using a da-Vinci robotic system was used to perform RARP. Perioperative characteristics and postoperative oncologic and functional outcomes are reported.

RESULTS

The mean age was 61.3 years (37-77). Mean PSA level was 8.3 ng/ml. According to D'Amico classification, the percentage of patients with low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease cases were 65.0, 30.1, and 4.8 %, respectively. Mean operative time was 181.9 min. Mean estimated blood loss was 225.4 cc (30-1,250). Positive surgical margin (PSM) was detected in 212 (14.1 %) patients. PSM rates in pT2, pT3, and pT4 stages were 6.1, 37.1, and 100 %, respectively. The overall complication rate due to modified Clavien classification was 6.1 %. Mean follow-up time was 26.7 months. Continence, potency, and biochemical recurrence rates were 88.7, 58.2, and 2.9 %, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analyses including high-volume centers, which is the first largest series in Turkey, show that RARP is a safe procedure, has low PSM rates, high continence, and potency rates for the treatment of localized PC at experienced centers.

Developing technical expertise in robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy in a moderate-volume center through a proctor-based team approach

Our aim is to report our preliminary experience of a proctor-based team approach in robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Data was collected between December 2008 and February 2012. RALP was performed on 100 consecutive patients with prostate cancer by a team of five urologists proctored by two fellowship-trained surgeons from a single hospital. Clinical and pathological data of these patients were reviewed. The mean age of the patients was 66 years (range 48-76). Clinical stages were 82 % cT1c, 3 % cT1b, 13 % cT2a and 2 % cT3a disease. Preoperative mean prostate-specific antigen level was 11.33 ng/ml (SD 10.47). Mean operative time was 342 min and mean blood loss was 717 ml (SD 988). Mean hospital stay and duration of the indwelling catheter were 3.2 days (SD 1.8) and 12.6 days (SD 8.5), respectively. Pathological staging showed 65 patients with pT2a (65 %) disease and 33 patients with pT3a (33 %) disease. Thirty-five patients (35 %) had positive surgical margins. Eighteen patients underwent adjuvant radiotherapy. Overall postoperative complication rate was 14 %. There were six Clavien grade 1 complications, seven Clavien grade 2 complications and one Clavien grade 3 complication. At mean follow-up of 36 months, 100 % of patients remained free of biochemical recurrence with continence at 70 %. Our proctor-based team approach will continue to improve each surgeon's technical competency. He or she will continue to improve and gradually move on to achieving his or her outcomes learning curve.

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy demonstrates less morbidity than open radical prostatectomy: an analysis of the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database with a focus on surgical trainee involvement

INTRODUCTION

Complication rates of open radical prostatectomies (ORPs) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomies (LRPs) performed by highly experienced surgeons in centers of excellence are well known. Using a standardized, national, risk-adjusted surgical database, we compared 30-day outcomes following ORP and LRP and analyzed how trainee involvement influenced outcomes.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) is a risk-adjusted data collection analyzing preoperative risk factors, demographics, and 30-day postoperative outcomes. From 2005 to 2011, we identified 10,669 total prostatectomies. Of these, 2278 were ORP and 8391 were LRP. Data on trainee involvement were available on 63% of cases.

RESULTS

Comparison of all 10,669 prostatectomies showed a decreased incidence of overall morbidity, serious morbidity, surgical site infections, mortality, wound disruption, urinary tract infection, bleeding, and sepsis or septic shock (p<0.05) for LRP compared with ORP. Trainee involvement was associated with a higher incidence of bleeding, overall and serious morbidity (p<0.001). This difference is isolated to postgraduate year (PGY) 6-10 trainees performing ORP (p<0.001). Overall and serious morbidity was equivalent between PGY groups 1-10 versus attending without trainee performing LRP and PGY groups 1-5 versus attending without trainee performing ORP. Operative times were shorter for ORP versus LRP by an average of 38 minutes (p<0.05), and in cases involving trainees, operative times decreased with trainee experience for both procedures. The length of stay was shorter for LRP compared with ORP (3.2 vs. 1.8 days, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The large sample size, standardized data definitions, and quality control measures of the ACS-NSQIP database allow for in-depth analysis of subtle, but significant differences in outcomes between groups. Trainee involvement in LRP appears safe to patients. However, the increased morbidity in ORP involving trainees may be mitigated by awareness, simulation laboratories, and standardized competency assessment.

Efficacy of using three-tesla magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis of capsule invasion for decision-making about neurovascular bundle preservation in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy of using 3-tesla (T) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) diagnosis of extracapsular extension (ECE) for decision-making about neurovascular bundle (NVB) preservation in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for prostate cancer (PC).

Materials and Methods

We prospectively collected data on PC patients (n=67) who underwent preoperative 3-T MRI before RARP. The choice between nerve sparing or resection was based on 3-T MRI findings of ECE. We compared the MRI findings with the pathological data on surgical margins. Our clinical staging in this study was defined only by MRI.

Results

When the data were divided by prostate lobe (right lobe or left lobe, n=134), 3-T MRI showed 28 positive cases of ECE in 134 prostate lobes, allowing NVB preservation in 42 cases (31.3%). Nerve-sparing surgery was achieved in 38.7% of cases in which clinical T2 staging by MRI was reported. The pathological data revealed that 10 of 134 prostate lobes had positive ECE. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for predicting stage T3 (positive ECE) by side were 60.0% (12 of 20 sides), 86.0% (98 of 114 sides), 42.9% (12 of 28 sides), and 92.5% (98 of 106 sides), respectively.

Conclusions

Three-T MRI prior to RARP enables the use of ECE diagnosis to guide decision-making about NVB preservation, with comparatively high specificity and negative predictive value. Further prospective studies are underway to reach more definitive conclusions.

Improvement of the surgical curability of locally confined prostate cancer including non-organ-confined high-risk disease through retropubic radical prostatectomy with intentional wide resection

Background

Retropubic radical prostatectomy with intentional wide resection (RRP-WR), which enables clear location of the prostate apex and the performance of posterolateral wider resection to remove extraprostatic extension, was introduced to our institutions. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility and the efficacy of RRP-WR as a surgical intervention for locally confined prostate cancer.

Methods

A total of 90 Japanese patients with pathologically proven and clinically locally confined hormone-naïve prostate cancer were treated through RRP-WR, and the surgical morbidity was assessed. The patients were observed without immediate treatment until biochemical recurrence (BCR).

Results

The surgical morbidities were comparable to conventional procedures. No positive surgical margin (pSM) was pathologically identified in pT2 cases from prostatectomy specimens. It was identified in only 14.3% of pT3a cases, 36.4% of pT3b cases and 100% of pT4 cases. No apical pSM was found except for one of the pT4 cases in the levator ani muscle. PSA was at an undetectable level in 80.0% of all cases, 90.0% of pT2 cases, and 67.5% of pT3 and pT4 cases after surgery. The BCR-free survival rate in all cases was 82.4% and that of high-risk cases without pSM was 76.9% at a median follow-up of 19.3 months (3.3 to 59.2).

Conclusions

RRP-WR is feasible and effective in removing organ-confined prostate cancer as well as extraprostatic extension without pSM. Thus, it is worthwhile to evaluate if this procedure improves the clinical outcome of locally confined prostate cancer including high-risk conditions treated by surgical intervention.

Comparison of oncological and functional outcomes of pure versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed by a single surgeon

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare oncological and functional outcomes of pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) performed by a single surgeon.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In total, 327 consecutive patients with prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy (144 with LRP and 183 with RALRP) were enrolled. No significant differences were found in prostate-specific antigen level, biopsy Gleason score, clinical T stage or D'Amico risk stratification between the two groups. The operating time was longer in the LRP group (p < 0.001). The RALRP group patients had significantly lower postoperative pain numerical rating scale (NRS) (p = 0.016) and catheter duration (p < 0.001). There were no differences in pathological Gleason score, pathological T stage or positive surgical margin rate. No differences were found in biochemical recurrence-free survival. Postoperative pad-free continence rates revealed a more rapid recovery in the RALRP group, but rates at 12 months were not significantly different. Multivariate analysis showed that the type of surgery was a strong independent factor to predict early postoperative pad use. Postoperative potency rates were not significantly different at 3, 6 and 12 months in patients who underwent nerve-sparing procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

LRP and RALRP performed by a single surgeon yielded similar results in terms of safety and oncological outcomes. More favorable outcomes were noted in operating time, pain NRS and catheter duration, as well as urinary continence recovery time. Therefore, RALRP showed more favorable components in terms of postoperative quality of life than LRP.

Comparative hospital cost-analysis of open and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy

OBJECTIVE

To perform a contemporary comparative cost-analysis of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) and open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP).

METHODS

All patients undergoing RARP (n = 115) or RRP (n = 358) by 1 of 4 surgeons at a single institution during a 15-month period were retrospectively reviewed. The hospital length of stay (LOS), operative time, hospital charges, reimbursement, and direct and indirect hospital costs were analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

The mean LOS between patients undergoing RARP (1.2 ± 0.6 days) and RRP (1.4 ± 0.8 days) was not significantly different. The operating room supply costs per case were almost 7 times greater for RARP ($2852 ± $528) than for RRP ($417 ± $59; P < .05). The ancillary, cardiology, imaging, administrative, laboratory, and pharmacy costs were not significantly different between the 2 approaches. The mean total costs per case for RARP exceeded the total costs for RRP by 62% ($14 006 ± $1641 vs $8686 ± $1989; P < .05). Payment to the hospital from all sources was nearly equivalent: $10 011 for RRP and $9993 for RARP. Therefore, the average profit for each RRP was $1325 and each RARP lost $4013.

CONCLUSION

In the present single-institution analysis, the total actual costs associated with RARP were significantly greater than those for RRP and were attributable to the robotic equipment and supplies.

Perioperative outcome of initial 190 cases of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy - A single-center experience

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the perioperative outcome of the first 190 cases of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed at our center from July 2006 to December 2010.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Operative and recovery data for men with localized prostate cancer undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy at our center were reviewed. All surgeries were performed using the 4-arm da Vinci-S surgical robot. Preoperative data included age, body mass index (BMI), prostate specific antigen (PSA) level, prostate weight, biopsy Gleason score and TNM staging, while operative and recovery data included total operative time, estimated blood loss, complications, hospital stay and catheter time. These parameters were evaluated for the safety and efficacy of this procedure in our center.

RESULTS

The mean age of our patients was 65 ± 1.2 years. The mean BMI was 25.20 ± 2.88 and the median PSA was 14.8 ng/ml. Majority of our patients belonged to clinical stage T2 (51.58%). The mean total operative time was 166.44 ± 11.5 min. Six patients required conversion to open procedure and there was one rectal injury. The median estimated blood loss was 302 ± 14.45 ml and the median duration of hospital stay was 4 days. The overall margin positivity rate was 12.63%.

CONCLUSION

Despite our limited robotic surgery experience, our perioperative outcome and complication rate is comparable to most contemporary series. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) is easy to learn and provides the patient with the benefits of minimally invasive surgery with minimal perioperative morbidity.

Learning curve for radical retropubic prostatectomy

PURPOSE

The learning curve is a period in which the surgical procedure is performed with difficulty and slowness, leading to a higher risk of complications and reduced effectiveness due the surgeon's inexperience. We sought to analyze the residents' learning curve for open radical prostatectomy (RP) in a training program.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective study from June 2006 to January 2008 in the academic environment of the University of Sao Paulo. Five residents operated on 184 patients during a four-month rotation in the urologic oncology division, mentored by the same physician assistants. We performed sequential analyses according to the number of surgeries, as follows: ≤ 10, 11 to 19, 20 to 28, and ≥ 29.

RESULTS

The residents performed an average of 37 RP each. The average psa was 9.3 ng/mL and clinical stage T1c in 71% of the patients. The pathological stage was pT2 (73%), pT3 (23%), pT4 (4%), and 46% of the patients had a Gleason score 7 or higher. In all surgeries, the average operative time and estimated blood loss was 140 minutes and 488 mL. Overall, 7.2% of patients required blood transfusion, and 23% had positive surgical margins.

CONCLUSION

During the initial RP learning curve, we found a significant reduction in the operative time; blood transfusion during the procedures and positive surgical margin rate were stable in our series.

Experience of 100 laparoscopic radical prostatectomies performed by a single surgeon: an analysis of surgical and functional outcomes

PURPOSE

We analyzed the surgical and functional outcomes of 100 consecutive laparo-scopic radical prostatectomies (LRP) performed by a single surgeon.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between October 2007 and May 2010, a total of 100 consecutive patients underwent LRP for prostate cancer at our institution. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of these patients to determine surgical and functional results. We compared surgical and functional outcomes between three groups divided on the basis of operation period (Group 1; first 40 cases; Group 2; next 30 cases; Group 3; last 30 cases).

RESULTS

The operative time decreased significantly as the surgeon's experience increased over time (P<0.01). The learning curve for operative time was surpassed after approximately 40 cases. The overall positive surgical margin (PSM) rate was 17.5% in Group 1, 16.7% in Group 2, and 10% in Group 3. For organ-confined disease, the PSM rate was 2.5%, 6.7%, and 3.3% in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The continence rate (absence of a pad) was 73.2% and the social continence rate was 94.7% at 12 months after surgery. There was a significant difference in continence (absence of pad) between the early (Group 1) and late group (Group 3) at 1, 3, and 6 months (P<0.0001). The continence rate was not affected by whether the pubic bone-anchoring procedure or the Rocco suture method was used. The overall potency rate was 16.7% and 48.6% at 6 and 12 months, respectively. For bilateral nerve-sparing cases, the potency rate was 20% and 57.1% at 6 and 12 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our surgical and functional outcomes indicate that even in this 'robotic era', LRP is still an attractive treatment option for patients with localized prostate cancer, especially in areas with limited access to surgical robots.

[Additional personal contributions for minimally invasive surgery : How high is patient acceptance?]

OBJECTIVE

Increasing costs of the healthcare system might decrease the spectrum of insurance financed medical treatment in the future. Therefore we evaluated whether patients are prepared to pay partial costs of their own, especially for minimally invasive surgery. METHODICS: Between 1st July 2007 and 1st July 2008 patients were asked in a prospective trial preoperatively and postoperatively whether they would be prepared to pay an additional invoice of 200 EUR for a minimally invasive operation. Payment was reasoned by the hypothesis that insurance companies will reduce the DRG payment while costs are rising.

RESULTS

A total of 750 patients, men:women=279 (37.2%):471 (62.8%) undergoing elective minimally invasive operations were included in the trial. For the majority of patients (m=266:13; w=448:23) it was very important to be operated on in a center for minimally invasive surgery. Preoperatively and postoperatively the majority of patients voted for individual payment of 200 EUR to make minimally invasive surgery possible (84.4 versus 84.1%, respectively, p=0.79). Although 80.4% (411/511) of patients with national health insurance voted for payment, voting of patients with private insurance was significantly increased to 92.9% (222/239) (p<0.001). Voting for individual payment increased with a rising level of education (p=0.017), job position and income (p<0.001). Furthermore, it was significantly increased in married compared to single patients (86.5% versus 78.4%, respectively, p=0.038).

CONCLUSION

Before the operations 84.4% of patients voted for additional individual payment for minimally invasive operations but this was dependent on the socio-economic status.

Open Versus Laparoscopic Versus Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy: The European and US Experience

Open radical prostatectomy (ORP) is the reference standard for the surgical management of localized prostate cancer. With wider availability of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy techniques, there is a debate regarding the standard treatment of the management of localized prostate cancer. Therefore, we reviewed the current status of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) as compared with ORP. Because no prospective, randomized trials comparing the different techniques have been performed, outcomes must be assessed from published series by centers that focus on ORP, LRP, and RALRP. Aside from reducing the amount of blood loss, current data suggest that the most significant outcomes (cure, continence, and potency) are no better with LRP or RALRP than with conventional ORP. Therefore, in experienced hands, ORP remains the gold standard procedure. However, there is a trend toward consistently better outcomes following RALRP in comparison with LRP. In the end, individual patient outcomes can be maximized by choosing the best modality based on the patient's comorbid medical conditions, cancer characteristics, and surgeon experience. Future studies are needed to further investigate long-term cancer control as well as functional outcomes for RALRP series.

Is there an optimal management for localized prostate cancer?

Widespread screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) has led to a significant increase in the detection of early stage, clinically localized prostate cancer (CaP). Various treatment options for localized CaP are discussed in this review article including active surveillance, radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, and cryotherapy. The paucity of high-level evidence adds a considerable amount of controversy when choosing the "optimal" intervention, for both the treating physician and the patient. The long time course of CaP intervention outcomes, combined with continuing modifications in treatments, further complicate the matter. Lacking randomized trials that compare treatment options, this review article attempts to summarize the different treatment options and associated side-effects, including effects on health-related quality of life, from current published literature.

Cost comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Demand and utilization of minimally invasive approaches to radical prostatectomy have increased in recent years, but comparative studies on cost are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To compare costs associated with robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The study included 643 consecutive patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (262 RALP, 220 LRP, and 161 RRP) between September 2003 and April 2008.

MEASUREMENTS

Direct and component costs were compared. Costs were adjusted for changes over the time of the study.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Disease characteristics (body mass index, preoperative prostate-specific antigen, prostate size, and Gleason sum score 8-10) were similar in the three groups. Nerve sparing was performed in 85% of RALP procedures, 96% of LRP procedures, and 90% of RRP procedures (p<0.001). Lymphadenectomy was more commonly performed in RRP (100%) compared to LRP (22%) and RALP (11%) (p<0.001). Mean length of hospital stay was higher for RRP than for LRP and RALP. The median direct cost was higher for RALP compared to LRP or RRP (RALP: $6752 [interquartile range (IQR): $6283-7369]; LRP: $5687 [IQR: $4941-5905]; RRP: $4437 [IQR: $3989-5141]; p<0.001). The main difference was in surgical supply cost (RALP: $2015; LRP: $725; RRP: $185) and operating room (OR) cost (RALP: $2798; LRP: $2453; RRP: $1611; p<0.001). When considering purchase and maintenance costs for the robot, the financial burden would increase by $2698 per patient, given an average of 126 cases per year.

CONCLUSIONS

RALP is associated with higher cost, predominantly due to increased surgical supply and OR costs. These costs may have a significant impact on overall cost of prostate cancer care.

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy

Prostate cancer remains a significant health problem worldwide and is the second highest cause of cancer-related death in men. While there is uncertainty over which men will benefit from radical treatment, considerable efforts are being made to reduce treatment related side-effects and in optimising outcomes. This article reviews the development and introduction of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP), the results to date, and the possible future directions of RALP.

Critical appraisal of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To perform a contemporary critical appraisal of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RaRP) through a review of the recent literature.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most studies of RaRP are observational and report perioperative, functional and short-term oncological outcomes. RaRP is associated with less blood loss and blood transfusion than open radical prostatectomy (ORP), has a positive margin rate of 9.4-20.9%, potency rate of 79.2-80.4% at 1 year and a continence rate of 90.2-97% at 1 year. Costs of the da Vinci system remain a limitation of this technique.

SUMMARY

RaRP has shown rapid dissemination over the past few years in the US urological community. However, prospective randomized clinical trials with long-term follow-up of RaRP, ORP and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy are still necessary.